Blue Heron Estates Development Denied Land Will Remain Zoned As Agricultural

The Spokane County hearing examiner denied a developer’s request to build a neighborhood association at the end of Indian Trail Road.

A conglomeration of developers wanted to build Blue Heron Estates on 418 acres just east of the intersection of Indian Trail and Rutter Parkway.

They wanted to carve the parcel into 95 lots for single-family residences and an 18-hole golf course.

The land is currently categorized as general agricultural and Hearing Examiner Mike Dempsey said it’s going to stay that way.

Developers wanted him to rezone it for semi-rural residential use.

A line in Dempsey’s written decision may have summed up his opinion on the proposal best.

“It will not serve the public use and interest,” Dempsey wrote.

Not everyone agrees. A number of Indian Trail residents who live near the area testified in May that the low-density development would have fit well in the community.

“I was in favor of it,” said Michael Mainer. “I thought it was good use and an outstanding design for a championship golf course in the area. I think it would have been good use of the property.”

Peter and Linda Rayner wanted to build an 18-hole golf course, clubhouse, storage building and driving range in addition to the 95 residences.

Peter Rayner has appealed Dempsey’s decision.

“It’s heartbreaking to say the least; it’s incredible,” Rayner said.

Road access to the development would have been provided by a series of private roads connecting to Indian Trail and Rutter Parkway which would have been managed by the homeowners association.

Officials with the county said the site sits within the Spokane Aquifer and that there are “potentially erodible soils” on portions of the site.

However, Rayner said no county official ever told him that an Environmental Impact Study was necessary.

The site lies outside the interim urban area boundaries designated by the county under the state Growth Management Act.

Dempsey had a substantial list of concerns about the proposed project.

It doesn’t conform to the Comprehensive Plan and didn’t factor in the public health, safety and welfare of its residents, he said.

“Appropriate emergency access has not been established for phases 2 and 3 of the project.”

And, “ The project has significant opposition from neighboring property owners and public agencies.”

Those comments were in stark contrast to the sentiment expressed at the May hearing.

Rayner purchased the land in 1993. At the time he believed the city was going to annex the land. His original plan called for more than 1,000 units on the land.

But the annexation never occurred, so Rayner approached the county. At the advice of officials, he scaled back the development considerably.

Rayner said he has spent thousands of dollars and a lot of time trying to get the county to approve his development.

“This is something that we believe would be good for the community,” Rayner said. “I can’t see any legitimate reason why it has been denied.”